Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

The key word about the troops is he will START bringing....sm

Posted By: oldtimer on 2008-11-24
In Reply to: A lie is a lie - Just me

then home and I believe he will START in 60-90 days after he is sworn in. As for all the other promises you say he has already broken, he is not even president yet and I am very encouraged by plans being set forth to deal with the most pressing problems we all face. Get over it. Your guy didn't win. Give our guy a chance.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Bringing our troops home would also.....
save our country a sh&tload of money.....
Well...first he said he was bringing the troops home immediately...
if he was elected. Now he is talking about a "phased" withdrawal. Was he lying then, or is he lying now? He said: "I never heard that kind of sermon." Then he said: "Yes, I did hear some of that." That is on tape on You Tube. Which place was he lying? He said he barely knew William Ayers. We know now that is a lie. There are several more.
If the government doesn't start bringing our jobs back,
Sure ain't gonna be any MTs. Even if the auto industry retools and builds super-duper fuel-free cars that run only on AIR, what're they gonna COST? Most likely only the rich will be able to afford them.
You cannot type it word for word, just provide a link.
.
I remember the debate. And of course this is not word for word, I NEVER said...sm
*because I'm not.* This is a LIE that I got tired of arguing with them about then. Unless you are confusing me with an old poster that went under the moniker Demo.
Sambo thinks last word=best word...
su
you keep bringing it up
I haven't seen anything that Obama has done that has disrespected this country or our flag. Refusal to wear jewelry is not going to sway my vote. I have seen him put his hand on his heart to say the pledge, both on TV clips and while visiting the senate.
Thank you for bringing it to the top
There are so many posts (especially because its only days away and a lot of emotions are flying), but I read this and thought it a very critical article. I remember one story in particular of a woman who said she was a McCain supporter but she moved to the Obama side, etc, etc., and when the news people followed up on her to find out why she she went over, she admitted she didn't really move over, they paid her to be in a commercial.

Politics - it's all dirty campaign tactics to fool everyone. I guess that's his campaign though - "Yes we can" (i.e., yes we can fool and trick the people. Yes we an demonize and attack the other side. Yes we can make everything look like what it isn't).
Bringing Mrs. M to the top
Actually no I dont like Palin.  I can barely tolerate McCain.  I am a democrat.  I just didnt feel that I could vote for O for a few reasons that were very important to me.  So I voted for McCain and Palin just so that I could have a voice.  I was very torn about my decision and I actually like some of the things that Obama is for.  But at the same time, I am strongly agaist others.  I do feel that there are many unanswered questions about some of his relationships and that worries me.  Some of his ideas also worry me.  I know that he is our president and I respect that but that doesnt mean that I have to agree with him.  I am just really tired of a debate about the two parties that seems to be very one sided.  The dems say the race is over, let it go but then they continue to trash McCain/Palin.  If someone trashes O, the dems get nasty.  It has brought out the worst in me today, that is for sure.  For that I apologize.  I am quite certain that I have not acted like God would want me to today!  But it just seems to me that O supporters cant even for one minute entertain the thought that something might not be on the up and up on SOME of his issues or things that he supports. 
This is why we have to keep bringing it up....(sm)

because you STILL don't get it.  I don't care that Bristol is an unwed mother.  I don't care if the guy lived in Palin's house.  And no, I don't rule my kids with an iron fist -- unlike the religious right.  You have simply missed the point...AGAIN.


The whole point isn't that this stuff is happening.  Dems (of all people) know these things happen.  However, we are not the ones out there preaching abstinence (that doesn't work), spouting out about how terrible unwed mothers supposedly are, how homosexuals are just going straight to he11, and how you MUST be a murderer if you have an abortion.  YOU guys --- REPUBLICANS -- are the ones preaching that day and night, 24/7.  I can guarantee that if that had been a democrat who had done that the first thing out of your mouths would have been--- where was her father?  As in, insinuating that the mother (in this case Palin) would somehow be at fault because she didn't provide the proper guidance for her child.


And now after all those years of preaching that crap, who do you put up as a potential leader of this country?  The mother of an unwed pregnant teenager -- who Palin decided to flaunt all over the country, and who also obviously encouraged this boy to move in with her daughter -- as in, living in sin.


There is only one word for this:  Hypocrisy.  You do know that Palin cut funding in Alaska for benefits for unwed mothers?  Hmmm....


Thanks for bringing this to the front...nm

Sorry to keep bringing it up - SCHIP

I found this website while trying to look up some more info and thought I'd share it.


http://www.ncsl.org/print/health/CRSSbyS0807.pdf


I'm now thoroughly confused on the arguments against expanding it.  It does require proof of citizenship (states responsibility to document), so I'm not quite sure how that means it will allow illegal immigrants access - at least any more access than they already have to medicaid - however they get it.  It also seems to state that the limit on income will be determined by the states - which would somewhat answer the question I posted below.  I've heard interviews on television with those against the expansion quoting the $88,000 limit.  (which I did not see mentioned, but I certainly have no idea what's discussed in Congress).  As I said below, for a family whose living expenses are relatively low, $88,000 is a lot of money, but for a family who lives where the living expenses are insanely high, $88,000 does not go as far. 


Observer, or any others, have  you found a site that explains why some are against it? 


bringing my answer up from below

i wanted to bring this up from below because i want people to read it that are for abortion.  i want them to watch the video mentioned here.


into poverty, but you don't want the money it takes to care for these children to come out of your pocket????  Am I on the mark? 



 


Answer:  First of all, I wouldnt be forcing anyone to have a baby born into poverty.  That would be THEIR choice.  Yes, it is a CHOICE to get pregnant or not.  If you dont want to get pregnant you should use BIRTH CONTROL, given out FREE to anyone who cannot afford it.  Of course, you cannot actually shove it down someone's throat and make them swallow it, I guess.  Second, I already DO pay for these unwanted children.  It is called WELFARE. 




 


I guess this is another so-called way to sling mud at Obama.  The rich republicans can't have it both ways.  You either care for the unborn (welfare for their mothers) or you allow the mother the choice...  Which is it?


Answer:  First, I am not slinging mud at Obama.  I would be against abortion no matter who was running for office.  Second, I am not a rich republican but a poor democrat.  Sorry to dissappoint!  Third, I believe that education about birth control and sex should be funded more, there should be more support out there for teens on how to NOT GET PREGNANT in the first place.  Second, there are NO unwanted children in the world.  If the natural mother did not want the child, there should be, and I am sure there are, government funded programs to allow these girls to adopt out their babies to the MILLIONS of people who want to adopt.  Also, our government should help fund would be parents to be able to adopt w/o having to spend thousands of dollars to do it.  So that way people in the good ole' USA could adopt w/o having to go to third world countries to do it.  Another thing, the government should reevaluate their priorities in that it costs almost nothing to have an abortion and commit murder versus spending thousands on adoption.  Go figure that one!


Not all abortions are a form of birth control, ya' know.  I knew a very religious lady that aborted her child due to hydrocephalus.  The child would been born deformed/a vegetable.  This would have put this lady at high risk.  She prayed about it and soon after aborted the child.  She had to live with that. 



 


That is the child that God gave her.  I dont have all the answers about why that would be, but murder is still murder.  So does that mean because the baby was deformed that he was less of a baby, a human life?  Not our call to make.  As far as her having to live with that, this is true.  However, as a Christian, we also have to live with whoever we put into office.  They represent us, our beliefs.  We have to answer for who we give the power to.  We are all responsible. 




 


Not all situations are the same.  Furthermore, you can't force your child to have a baby or to have an abortion.  Either way, it's her body.



 


In the OT of the Bible God speaks about the children of Israel.  They were worshipping an idol and offering their children to it.  He spoke about innocent blood be shed and he was angered by it.  He speaks quite clearly that it is murder.  Also, if anyone supports abortion, I think they should go to the faith board and click on the post not for everyone and find the link in there to a video, copy and paste and watch what happens to an aborted fetus.  At 19 weeks what a baby looks like and see what happens to them when the are killed.  I mean, after all, if you can condone it, then you should be able to watch it.


So I'm bringing my questions right along behind you.
Never said you were lying. Simply asked for what you have provided and I was able to finally find on my own. So here is the post you would like to leave buried below while you celebrate your victory. Still need these answers.

So, it seems that McCain also has a refundable tax credit in his plan too...larger, in fact than Obama's. $2500 for individuals and $5000 for couples for health insurance. This begs my original question, which yet have to answer.

Whe Obama adjusts taxs rates within our historical progressive tax structure, it's socialism. When anybody else does it, it's not. So, I am wondering...if Obama has a smaller refundable tax credit in his plan than McCain, why is it welfare under Obama and not under McCain?
Bringing this to the top before it gets buried...sm
This is just absolutely amazing. I wonder how many of Obama's bots are here on this very forum?

http://www.rense.com/general83/nrw.htm
Oh, he's bringing change all right.....LOL.
nm
Supporting them would be bringing them home, and then there would...sm
not be such a wish list.

We had a friend stationed in Iraq (she is back now, thank God) and we sent her some lotions and things she asked for, but I'll admit I didn't know there were wish lists like this on the web. From the contacts I have over there with my uncle and brother in law (back now thank God) being males they told us not to send anything because they have/had everything they needed. I have searched the web just now and found many on the web, and I will do whatever my heart and pocketbook leads me to do as far as sending care packages.

You can't judge a book by it's cover. Just because you have 8 boxes in your office ready to go doesn't make you anymore patriotic than the next man.
Bringing up from below about taxes/unions

At first we were told the outsourcing was to cut labor costs.  Only after this campaign rhetoric took hold did the issue of taxes come up.  Now I ask you, if the reason for outsourcing is taxes, what the heck?  Didn't Bush CUT taxes.


It seems that American people have lost the reasoning side of their collective brains.  When I quit working a few months ago I was making LESS than I made in the 80s.  How is that possible?  The cost of medical care has not gone down.  The cost of medical insurance has not gone down.  I posted some time ago about a local hospital that laid off their most experienced nurses, not a few of them, ALL of them, and hired new graduate nurses to replace them at lesser wages.  What was that about?  They got away with it though.  Anything to increase the bottom line profit.


This is true in every industry.  They like to blame labor for everything.  Well, how the heck can you buy a $2+ loaf of bread and $5 gallon of milk on minimum wage, ya know?  Take gasoline for example.  Sure it has gone down the last days but is it back where it was when oil was what?  $86 a barrel or whatever?  No and it never will be.


So that car you drive.........how much do you think of the price tag is labor? 


These things are what really aggravates me.  People just can't seem to use reasoning power any more.  I'll give you an example:  After my husband lost his job in the CF fiasco, he drove for awhile for a friend who owns a trucking company.  I went with him on a trip.  He picked up a load of beef in Boonesville, AR, hauled it to Chicago, no problem.  Then they sent him somewhere in Ohio to pick up a load of vinegar to take to Florida.  Got to Ohio and I forget the reason but he couldn't pick up the vinegar. Then he was sent (empty) to Logan (?), Kentucky where he picked up 40,000 pounds of chocolate covered doughnuts which he delivered to Phoenix.  In Phoenix they told him that most of that load would be routed back to Atlanta.  Now what kind of sense does that make?  Taxes the problem?  I would say poor management is a bigger problem than taxes OR labor.


I'm sorry about your dad's experience.  People used to do things like that.  I recall my late father-in-law, worked for the fire department in Fort Worth and he said during the depression they did the same thing, worked less so the ones with less seniority could keep a job.  They all suffered but they suffered together and somehow they all made it as did your parents.


I am just horrified at the apparent digress of intelligence in this country.  It seems people believe anything the news media or anyone else tells them.  Seems they have totally lost the ability to reason and God forbid that anyone should think of anyone other than themself.


All that said, feel free to go ahead and believe that companies are outsourcing jobs because of labor costs or taxes.  The unionized workers, under Reagan, started taking wage concessions, that is taking a DECREASE in pay to keep jobs.  How did that work?  Don't believe I've heard of any of the victims of outsourcing even being offered a pay cut to keep the jobs in this country.  Certainly not the Rheem plant in Fort Smith that the other day laid off the last 600 workers.  They sent most of their production to Mexico a few years ago.  Fort Smith they say is dying because of outsourcing.  Their reason?  They say, it's "labor costs."  Well, then, how is it that people can't afford to pay their bills with all the excessive wages they're supposedly receiving. Obviously the next in vogue EXCUSE will be that taxes are lower in other countries.  B.S.!!!!!!!


 


Bringing up from below about my "Judas Goat"
I doubt we'll ever know what kind of leadership the "Judas Goat" would offer as I would be willing to bet McCain/Palin will be in the White House by hook or CROOK.  So if I'm correct, then we'll know whether McCain is as great as you pubs think.  I hope he is.  IF he is, I will come back here and share my pot of crow.  I actually LOVE eating crow when I'm actually proven wrong.......which is seldom.
Bringing the refundable tax credits to the top,,,

Took some looking, but found it.


 


o A $1,000 “Making Work Pay” Tax Credit. For 95 percent of workers and their families—150 million
workers overall—the “Making Work Pay” credit will provide a refundable tax cut of $500 for workers or
$1,000 for working couples. This credit will benefit over 15 million self employed workers and for 10
million low-income Americans, will completely eliminate their federal income taxes.
o A Refundable $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a $4,000 fully refundable
tax credit to ensure that college is affordable for all American families. This credit will cover
100% of the first $4,000 of qualified tuition expenses, making community college essentially free and
covering about 2/3 of the cost of public 4-year college.iv
o A Universal 10% Mortgage Interest Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a 10% refundable credit to
offset mortgage interest payments and make homeownership more affordable for lower- and middle-income
families. This universal credit will provide an average tax cut of $500 to 10 million homeowners who do not itemize.

I see refundable in there a few times. And there you have the low income folks who will, with the help of this "credit," ELIMINATE their federal taxes. Who is going to take up that slack?




 


Obama bringing terrorists to the US?
The president-elect's advisers QUIETLY craft a proposal to ship dozens, if not hundreds, of imprisoned terrorism suspects to the United States to face criminal trials.

Under plans being put together in Obama's camp, some detainees would be released and many others would be prosecuted in U.S. criminal courts.

Sorry, but I want my tax dollars and priority to focus more on our economy, jobs, war, health care, then bringing terrorists to our country for court. Not a priority on my list. What is he up to, bringing terrorists to the US? Afraid to find out.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/10/obama-planning-trials-guantanamo-detainees/
If you're over it...stop bringing it up!
Oh I get it...if you stop bringing it up, you will have no one to blame but yourself for the problems in your life.
I find it unbelievable that they keep bringing this up.

It only makes things worse, not better. The anger it causes with "outsiders" coming to that small town does not do any good. Let the people of that town alone. They're doing okay without outsiders stirring up trouble.


I'm not just talking about that town. It happens all over the USA. These groups get together and go to a town just to stir up trouble. I've seen it happen again and again. They have no right sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong. Let them protest in their own towns.


The KKK does this all the time, too. They don't get the press, though, and they shouldn't be sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong, either.


I'm bringing up post I did this morning as it really irks me.

I'm proud to be a gun-toting, religious, redneck from PA, but we are not any more racist than any other state or person.


The O thinks we are all of the above, so why does he keep coming into the state to campaign? You would think he would fear us.  His buddy Murtha really blundered on his comment and now thinks an apology will smooth things over. If the O gets in, he will take our guns away and we will have no protection at all from criminals.  It's our constitutional right to own guns.


He's a glib talker but what is he really saying? He definitely can't smile or debate his way through the terrorists.


Rendel-D, our precious governor, ran our state into the ground with giving money away to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh mostly for convention centers and sports centers and now for casinos. Why?  He loves sports and gambling. When Rendel was mayor of Philadelphia, he almost bankrupt that city with his shenanigans.  I'm so glad his term will be over soon. Maybe then Pennsylvanians will be able to get back to work. Our roads are back to being #1 on the Worst Roads in the U.S. He made sure there would be no money for road construction.


He promised all kinds of tax cuts, property taxes mostly, if the bill passed for the casinos. That was a few years ago. Where's the cut? Our property taxes went up, not down! No rebates as he promised, but we have 20,000 (exaggeration) different ways to play the lotteries between instant tickets and 3 digit, 4 digit, 5 digit, 6 digits, power ball, etc.


Casey-D didn't do a good job for us, either. He made everyone who owned a service business (that was me back then) pay 6% sales tax on our earnings EXCEPT lawyers and doctors. I'm confused. Don't they provide a service? Sure they do. He also upped our taxes. His son, sad to say, is now a Senator. First he ran for another post and won, and before that term was up, he ran for Senator and won.  How can the people of of PA fall for this again? Just hearing him talk makes me sick.


Sorry, I don't buy the dems making a better life for us. They make it worse.


I will get off my soapbox now.


Gitmo -- bringing this up top cause I'm just lazy and don't want to scroll.

Obama told George Stephanopoulos at ABC News:


 


"We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution."


 


I'm sorry, but those being held at Gitmo are not citizens of the United States; therefore, are not entitled to any protection under the Constitution.  Why not say 'abide by the Geneva Convention'?  Even then, how many of our POWs were treated as outlined in the Geneva Convention?  Let's not forget, this is a war and these terrorists are POWs.  President Bush sought to protect the citizens of this country whatever the cost.  After the awful events of 9/11, it was his priority.  The world needs to know if you target the U.S. there are consequences. 


 


And I want to know where they are going to put these 250 or so terrorists?  I live 50 miles from Fort Leavenworth and that's a little too close for comfort for me.  I assume some will be released to return to their country where, of course, they will plot their next terrorist attack.  While others will be housed in federal facilities like Leavenworth and then what?  We sit them down for tea and crumpets and ask them nicely if they plan on blowing anything else up here in America? 


 

How quickly Americans have forgotten the victims and families of 9/11!
Stop bringing back memories.

Spam, powdered milk (hated it), that awful yellow cheese (yuk), oatmeal for breakfast every day for a year, but we ate it. No choice.  Took me 30 years to be able to eat oatmeal.


DH's parents used to get canned beef. Don't know how they got that. We never did. He liked it.


He's bringing dignity back to the White House!
Yes, I read something similar from a different source. Not that hard to believe when you see him giving unwanted massages and acting like a 9-year-old boy. Perhaps alcohol and cocaine ate more of his brain cells than anyone imagined. He can hardly get a sentence out without stumbling.
As usual, bringing up the past...how 'bout something original...
your inexperienced leader is already in over his head. It's okay sweetie, you'll get used to hearing your leader bashed and getting no respect. We had to endure that for 8 years now you will for the next 4.
oh yea - good point - bringing our medical records back from overseas
Never thought of that one.
yep. Its Fox. Just googled it. word for word. nm

nm


 


Not one word. One defitinion of a word.
Cult: 1. A system of religious worship or ritual.

Or how about this:

Cult: A system or community of religious worship and ritual.

Or my personal favorite:

Cult: A self-identified group of people who share a narrowly defined interest or perspective.

Thank God our troops

Okay...so you are okay with troops in ...
Afghanistan...just not in Iraq...?
Yes, has nothing to do with the troops.
And no, it does not make her a resident expert. Explain the differences of opinions amongst our own troops. Not all of them believe what they are doing is justified. Not every mother believes it either. It has nothing at all to do with being prideful of our sons and daughters. My point being is that their job is done. My brother is a gunny and is doing his job, but he no longer feels justified in doing it, and he is not alone. And I believe HIM. If the other poster is a resident expert because her son is in Iraq, then I guess that makes me a resident expert as well, no?

Yes, Liberal Thinker, and proud of it. I have not abandoned compassion. My agenda is to stop this needless war. My compassion is expanded to all not just a few. It started in my brain, and I am letting it spill out my mouth.

Yes. I criticize that with which I do not believe. That is our right is it not?

And last time I looked, this is a political forum, and a liberal forum at that.
It has nothing to do with our troops.
Why are you taken it so personally? You must realize that for every picture of sunshine your son sends you there is one that depicts suffering and starvation and death. I have family fighting it Iraq. It's doesn't change my stance that I feel that they are there unjustly. That's the real deal. Not quite sure how having family there makes you the resident expert. The point to my post was that we shouldn't be there anymore. Our troops have done what the Bush administration wanted done on the initial invasion. Now we are there fighting for an ideal that doesn't exist. So, in that perhaps you don't have a clue. If you son dies at the hands of an insurgent, those same insurgents who benefit from keeping unrest in the country and keeping it destabilized, a situation that our government and you refuse to recognize or better yet do anything about, I wonder if you will feel the same? Would his death be justified then? We are not fighting terrorists anymore in Iraq. They've moved on to other countries. What happens if there is another strike? Our troops are too thin and they are tired. Draft? Getting on your patriotic horse isn't help us end this war any sooner. There is no pride in this war anymore, if there ever was.

We have been paying Pakistan since 2001 to help fight terrorism. They haven't done much with our 10 billion dollars have they? If Al- Qaeda is to blame for Bhutto's death, then Pakistan should deal with it, and I don't believe we should be sending them anymore money. We shouldn't have been sending them money to begin with.

This is a widespread virus of Islamic extremism that we have concentrated mostly in Iraq while Al-Qaeda has gained strength in other countries while our military is being depleted. It is to their benefit this war continues because it destabilizes OUR country. Unless we have a full coalition from other countries to help fight this war, it cannot be won and we are wasting our time and our money on a pipe dream.

We do not have infinite resources to fight a civil unrest that will probably never be rectified. This war was handled poorly from the beginning and it is getting worse by the day.

I don't think YOU are paying attention to what is really go on in Iraq. Do you want your son there indefinitely? How about your son's son? This is a religious war for them, it will never end unless we end it.

That's what the troops are supposed to be doing
The key word is *securing.*  It's an extreme exaggeration to say that the U.S. was supporting Hezbollah by making sure a Suni and Shiite combined rally did not get out of hand, but it's par for the course of for the dramaticists known as the mainstream media.  Poor and misleading reporting is what they specialize in.
Say thanks to the troops...(see link)...sm
nm
Oh, so that is your message to our troops...
Go to work and do your job. Just live with the protesting and ignore it?
Somehow, I don't think our troops see things that way. sm
I don't think that is a good analogy. 
The troops speak

Replying to a post below, I thought this would be a good link in a separate message in case people skip over it below.


The US Military troops speak and here is what they say - 68% for McCain, 23% Obama.  Here is the link below.


http://activemilitaryformccain.blogspot.com/


So if you take that, plus Obama has a 5 point lead over McCain in today's polls, plus the 11% who are not decided it is a very close call.  November 4th is going to be an excited day for sure.


Yes, hurrah for the troops.....sm
I saw this the other day, and while I do not hold much stock in the mainstream polls that poll the dems 3 or 4:1, I was very heartened to see this story. Of course, I could only find it on Fox, and another military website.

Seems the mainstream media didn't want the rest of the American public to know about it, which is hardly surprising.


At any rate, since I believe the majority of those polled for this study are older military, who most likely are Republican, of course they support John McCain. They know that he is the most able leader for our country in times like these.


I'd also like to post this video again. Dear Mr. Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8
I agree with you about the troops.
I also believe that the REAL disgrace was for them to be sent into a war based on lies and the blind ambitions of the imperial wizard and his henchmen. I also do not believe that a policy based on "saving face" is worth sharing one more drop of blood over...on either side.
You just blew your pro troops facade. sm
but you are pretty easy to read. It isn't about the war or Cindy Sheehan or the price of gasoline.  It's about your virulent and soul destroying damnable hatred for George W. Bush that even goes so far as to extend to his family.  You, and those like you, put this country and our troops at risk every single day.  Why not do the right thing since you hate this war so very much.  BE A HUMAN SHIELD.  As if.
So much for caring about the troops. You are a joke. nm

I think you would be very surprised at how the troops see you, Lilly.

I am sure the troops in Afghanistan would be interested to know they are not there.
,
I never said I didn't support the troops!
You took what I said way out of context. I support the troops, I just want to know when it will be over. I want to know when our government will start to pay attention to OUR country instead of going around trying to fix everyone ELSE'S problems. I have a brother in the military...in Iraq. I never said I didn't support them. Unfortunately for them, they don't have a say in what they are having to do.
Implanted Chips in Our Troops? sm
Implanted Chips in Our Troops?

A Florida company wants to get under the skin of 1.4 million U.S. servicemen and women. VeriChip Corp, based in Delray Beach, Fla., and described by the D.C. Examiner as one of the most aggressive marketers of radio frequency identification chips, is hoping to convince the Pentagon to allow them to insert the chips, known as RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) chips under the skin of the right arms of U.S. servicemen and servicewomen to enable them to scan an arm and obtain that person’s identity and medical history. The chips would replace the legendary metal dog tags that have been worn by U.S. military personnel since 1906.

The device is usually implanted above the triceps area of an individual’s right arm, but can also by implanted in the hand if scanned at the proper frequency. The VeriChip responds with a unique 16-digit number, which can correlate the user to information stored on a database for identity verification, medical records access and other uses. The insertion procedure is performed under local anesthetic, and once inserted it is invisible to the naked eye.

The company, which the Examiner notes has powerful political connections, is in discussions” with the Pentagon, VeriChip spokeswoman Nicole Philbin told the Examiner. The potential for this technology doesn’t just stop at the civilian level,” Philbin said. Company officials have touted the chips as versatile, able to be used in a variety of situations such as helping track illegal immigrants or giving doctors immediate access to patient’s medical records.

On Monday the Department of State started to issue electronic passports (e-passports) equipped with RFID chips. According to reports the U.S. government has placed an order with a California company, Infineon Technologies North America, for smart chip-embedded passports.

The Associated Press said the new U.S. passports include an electronic chip that contains all the data contained in the paper version name, birth date, gender, for example and can be read by digital scanners at equipped airports. They cost 14 percent more than their predecessors but the State Department said they will speed up going through Customs and help enhance border security.

The company's hefty political clout is typified by having former secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, on its board of directors.

Thompson assured the Examiner that the chip is safe and that no one — not even military personnel, who are required by law to follow orders — will be forced to accept an implant against his or her will. He has also promised to have a chip implanted in himself but could not tell the Examiner when.

I’m extremely busy and I’m waiting until my hospitals and doctors are able to run some screens, he told the newspaper.

Not everybody agrees with Thompson, the Examiner reported, noting that the idea of implanting the chips in live bodies has some veterans’ groups and privacy advocates worried.

It needs further study,” Joe Davis, a retired Air Force major and a spokesman for the D.C. office of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, told the Examiner.

And Liz McIntyre, co-author with Katherine Albrecht of Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track your Every Move with RFID, said that VeriChip is a huge threat” to public privacy.

They’re circling like vultures for any opportunity to get into our flesh,” McIntyre told the Examiner. They’ll start with people who can’t say no, like the elderly, sex offenders, immigrants and the military. Then they’ll come knocking on our doors.”

In an e-mail to the Examiner, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wrote: If that is what the Defense Department has in mind for our troops in Iraq, there are many questions that need answers. What checks and balances, safeguards and congressional oversight would there be?” Leahy asked. What less-invasive alternatives are there? What information would be entered on the chips, and could it endanger our soldiers or be intercepted by the enemy?”

The company, the Examiner wrote, is also unsure about the technology. According to company documents, radio frequencies in ambulances and helicopters could disrupt the chips’ transmissions. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, VeriChip also said it was unsure whether the chip would dislodge and move through a person’s body. It could also cause infections and adverse tissue reactions,” the SEC filing states.

But Philbin downplayed the danger of the chips.

It’s the size of a grain of rice,” she said. It’s like getting a shot of penicillin.”

Newsmax.com


The difference between civilians vs troops...sm
I hear what you're saying and took some time to think on it. If I stood behind my CEO and felt that he had the best interest of the employees and patients (in my case) at heart then I would continue to do my job and even challenge the opposition. If I felt my CEO was slighting the hospital, I would leave. Troops don't have that option until their time is up.

And some troops who otherwise would have stayed enlisted have left because of the war. I know a few personally.
Add a support the troops magnet
to your car and you have my vote! Oops, aren't they made in China?
McCain does not support our troops

Since everyone is at least a bit familiar with John McCain’s record when it comes to strolling through a market in Baghdad with hundreds of his closest guards, or how he wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years (except when he flip flops on that).


But not that many really, truly know just how horrific his voting record is when it comes to the troops.  And it is pretty consistent – whether it is for armor and equipment, for veteran’s health care, for adequate troop rest or anything that actually, you know, supports our troops.


This is chock full of links to the roll call votes, and the roll call votes have links to the actual underlying bills and amendments.  I present this so that there is support and things that can be rattled off when saying that McCain is not a friend of the military.  Feel free to use it as you want, but this can be tied into the "Double Talk Express".  But here is a very quick statement - John McCain skipped close to a dozen votes on Iraq, and on at least another 10 occasions, he voted against arming and equipping the troops, providing adequate rest for the troops between deployments and for health care or other benefits for veterans.


In mid 2007, Senator Reid noted that McCain missed 10 of the past 14 votes on Iraq.  However, here is a summary of a dozen votes (two that he missed and ten that he voted against) with respect to Iraq, funding for veterans or for troops, including equipment and armor.  I have also included other snippets related to the time period when the vote occurred.


September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments.  At the time, nearly 65% of people polled in a CNN poll indicted that "things are going either moderately badly or very badly in Iraq.


July 2007:  McCain voted against a plan to drawdown troop levels in Iraq.  At the time, an ABC poll found that 63% thought the invasion was not worth it, and a CBS News poll found that 72% of respondents wanted troops out within 2 years.


March 2007: McCain was too busy to vote on a bill that would require the start of a drawdown in troop levels within 120 days with a goal of withdrawing nearly all combat troops within one year.  Around this time, an NBC News poll found that 55% of respondents indicated that the US goal of achieving victory in Iraq is not possible.  This number has not moved significantly since then.


February 2007:  For such a strong supporter of the escalation, McCain didn’t even bother to show up and vote against a resolution condemning it.  However, at the time a CNN poll found that only 16% of respondents wanted to send more troops to Iraq (that number has since declined to around 10%), while 60% said that some or all should be withdrawn.  This number has since gone up to around 70%.


June 2006:  McCain voted against a resolution that Bush start withdrawing troops but with no timeline to do so.


May 2006:  McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.


April 2006:  McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.


March 2006:  McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.


March 2004:  McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes.  Jeez, McCain really loves those tax loopholes for corporations, since he voted for them over our veterans' needs.


October 2003:  McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.


April 2003:  McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.


August 2001:  McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000.  To his credit, he also voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, which he now supports making permanent, despite the dire financial condition this country is in, and despite the fact that he indicated in 2001 that these tax cuts unfairly benefited the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class.


So there it is.  John McCain is yet another republican former military veteran who likes to talk a big game when it comes to having the support of the military.  Yet, time and time again, he has gone out of his way to vote against the needs of those who are serving in our military.  If he can’t even see his way to actually doing what the troops want, or what the veterans need, and he doesn’t have the support of veterans, then how can he be a credible commander in chief?